Supplementary Appendix to manuscript submitted by Trappe, R.U. et al:

Similar documents
Disclosure for Ralf Trappe, MD

16 Department of Nephrology and Intensive Care, Campus. 17 Department of Abdominal and Transplant Surgery,

Interim PET in Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma.The GEL/TAMO experience

Immune checkpoint inhibitors in lymphoma. Catherine Hildyard Haematology Senior Registrar Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust

Update: Non-Hodgkin s Lymphoma

Rituximab in the Treatment of NHL:

Radiotherapy in DLCL is often worthwhile. Dr. Joachim Yahalom Memorial Sloan-Kettering, New York

Methotrexate-associated Lymphoproliferative Disorders

Addition of rituximab is not associated with survival benefit compared with CHOP alone for patients with stage I diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

Modified Number of Extranodal Involved Sites as a Prognosticator in R-CHOP-Treated Patients with Disseminated Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma

Radiotherapy in aggressive lymphomas. Umberto Ricardi

Strategies for the Treatment of Elderly DLBCL Patients, New Combination Therapy in NHL, and Maintenance Rituximab Therapy in FL

New Evidence reports on presentations given at EHA/ICML Bendamustine in the Treatment of Lymphoproliferative Disorders

Outcomes of patients with peripheral T-cell lymphoma in first complete remission: data from three tertiary Asian cancer centers

Sponsor / Company: Sanofi Drug substance(s): Docetaxel (Taxotere )

Locoregional treatment Session Oral Abstract Presentation Saulo Brito Silva

Does the omission of vincristine in patients with diffuse large B cell lymphoma affect treatment outcome?

eastern cooperative oncology group Michael Williams, Fangxin Hong, Brad Kahl, Randy Gascoyne, Lynne Wagner, John Krauss, Sandra Horning

RADIOIMMUNOTHERAPY FOR TREATMENT OF NON- HODGKIN S LYMPHOMA

Non-Hodgkin lymphoma

2012 by American Society of Hematology

Nephrology Grand Rounds

Addition of rituximab to the CHOP regimen has no benefit in patients with primary extranodal diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

ATA129 for Epstein-Barr virusassociated. lymphoproliferative disorder

MANAGEMENT OF LYMPHOMAS

Prognostic Value of Early Introduction of Second Line in Patients with Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma

Open questions in the treatment of Follicular Lymphoma. Prof. Michele Ghielmini Head Medical Oncology Dept Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland

NON HODGKINS LYMPHOMA: INDOLENT Updated June 2015 by Dr. Manna (PGY-5 Medical Oncology Resident, University of Calgary)

Trial record 1 of 1 for:

Curing Myeloma So Close and Yet So Far! Luciano J. Costa, MD, PhD Associate Professor of Medicine University of Alabama at Birmingham

MMAE disrupts cell division and triggers apoptosis. Pola binds to cell surface antigen CD79b. Pola is internalized; linker cleaves, releasing MMAE

Dr Claire Burney, Lymphoma Clinical Fellow, Bristol Haematology and Oncology Centre, UK

11/2/2017. Immunodeficiencies. Joo Y. Song, MD Assistant Professor of Clinical Pathology. I have no financial disclosures.

Aggressive B-cell lymphomas and gene expression profiling towards individualized therapy?

Aggressive lymphomas ASH Dr. A. Van Hoof A.Z. St.Jan, Brugge-Oostende AV

LYSA PET adapted programs. O. Casasnovas Hematology department Hopital Le Bocage, CHU Dijon, France

The case for maintenance rituximab in FL

10/31/2017. Immunodeficiencies. Outline. Discuss EBV. Non-destructive Polymorphic Monomorphic Therapies Challenges

R/R DLBCL Treatment Landscape

CLINICAL STUDY REPORT SYNOPSIS

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY O R I G I N A L R E P O R T

BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE

Lancashire and South Cumbria Haematology NSSG Guidelines for Follicular Lymphoma:

HIV ASSOCIATED LYMPHOMA. Dr N Rapiti

CAR-T cell therapy pros and cons

Immunotherapy in the Adjuvant Setting for Melanoma: What You Need to Know

Correlation of pretreatment surgical staging and PET SUV(max) with outcomes in NSCLC. Giancarlo Moscol, MD PGY-5 Hematology-Oncology UTSW

The case against maintenance rituximab in Follicular lymphoma. Jonathan W. Friedberg M.D., M.M.Sc.

PET-adapted therapies in the management of younger patients (age 60) with classical Hodgkin lymphoma

FOLLICULAR LYMPHOMA: US vs. Europe: different approach on first relapse setting?

Rituximab and Combination Chemotherapy in Treating Patients With Non- Hodgkin's Lymphoma

Introduction ORIGINAL RESEARCH. Yoon Ah Cho 1, Woo Ick Yang 1, Jae-Woo Song 2, Yoo Hong Min 3 & Sun Och Yoon 1. Open Access.

III Sessione I risultati clinici

First Line Management of Classical Hodgkin Lymphoma

NON HODGKINS LYMPHOMA: AGGRESSIVE Updated June 2015 by Dr. Manna (PGY-5 Medical Oncology Resident, University of Calgary)

Learn more about diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), the most common aggressive form of B-cell non-hodgkin s lymphoma 1

EGFR inhibitors in NSCLC

BHS Educational Course on Hodgkin lymphoma and aggressive lymphoma Special situations

Negative effect of hepatitis in overall and progression-free survival among patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

Hematopoietic Stem-Cell Transplantation for Non-Hodgkin Lymphomas. Original Policy Date

Disclosures WOJCIECH JURCZAK

Outcome of DLBCL patients over 80 years: A retrospective survey from 4 Institutions

Bendamustine is Effective Therapy in Patients with Rituximab-Refractory, Indolent B-Cell Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma

The legally binding text is the original French version TRANSPARENCY COMMITTEE OPINION. 18 July 2012

Time-to-treatment of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in São Paulo

Dr. A. Van Hoof Hematology A.Z. St.Jan, Brugge. ASH 2012 Atlanta

CARE at ASH 2014 Lymphoma. Dr. Diego Villa Medical Oncologist British Columbia Cancer Agency Vancouver Cancer Centre

Clinicopathological Factors Affecting Distant Metastasis Following Loco-Regional Recurrence of breast cancer. Cheol Min Kang 2018/04/05

Autologous hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation in lymphoma

Significance of MYC/BCL2 Double Expression in Diffuse Large B-cell Lymphomas: A Single-center Observational Preliminary Study of 88 Cases

New Targets and Treatments for Follicular Lymphoma

Relapsed/Refractory Hodgkin Lymphoma

How I approach newly diagnosed Follicular Lymphoma patients with advanced stage? Professeur Gilles SALLES

Kamakshi V Rao, PharmD, BCOP, FASHP University of North Carolina Medical Center UPDATE IN REFRACTORY HODGKIN LYMPHOMA

Angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma: nobody knows what to do...

Background CPX-351. Lancet J, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(suppl): Abstract 7035.

Update: Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia

Marked improvement of overall survival in mantle cell lymphoma: a population based study from the Swedish Lymphoma Registry.

Professor Mark Bower

Dr. Nicolas Ketterer CHUV, Lausanne SAMO, May 2009

Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation for Non-Hodgkin's Lymphomas

ORIGINAL ARTICLE. Annals of Oncology 28: , 2017 doi: /annonc/mdx128 Published online 7 April 2017

Disclosures for Dr. Peter Borchmann 48 th ASH Annual meeting, Orlando, Florida

Have we moved beyond EPOCH for B-cell non-hodgkin lymphoma? YES!

What is the best second-line approach to induce remission prior to stem cell transplant? Single agent brentuximab vedotin

SUPPLEMENTARY FIG. S3. Kaplan Meier survival analysis followed with log-rank test of de novo acute myeloid leukemia patients selected by age <60, IA

ORIGINAL ARTICLE. Abstract. Introduction

Primary Endpoint The primary endpoint is overall survival, measured as the time in weeks from randomization to date of death due to any cause.

Pros and Cons: Interim PET in DLBCL Ulrich Dührsen Department of Hematology University Hospital Essen

LYMPHOMA IN OLDER PEOPLE. Ama Rohatiner, St. Bartholomew s Hospital, Londonj

Characteristics and treatment of DLBCL in elderly patients

Hematopoietic Stem-Cell Transplantation for Non-Hodgkin s Lymphomas

FDG-PET after two to three cycles of chemotherapy predicts progression-free and overall survival in high-grade non-hodgkin lymphoma

Extranodal natural killer/t-cell lymphoma with long-term survival and repeated relapses: does it indicate the presence of indolent subtype?

Role of prophylactic radiotherapy in Chinese patients with primary testicular diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: a single retrospective study

Product: Darbepoetin alfa Clinical Study Report: Date: 22 August 2007 Page 2 of 14145

Bodoky G, Gil-Delgado M, Cascinu S, Lipatov ON, Cunningham D, Van Cutsem E, Muro K, Chandrawansa K, Liepa AM, Carlesi R, Ohtsu A, Wilke H

SEQUENCING FOLLICULAR LYMPHOMA

TRANSPARENCY COMMITTEE OPINION. 8 November 2006

Clinicopathologic Profile and Outcome of Extranodal Diffuse Large B-Cell NHL: Egyptian National Cancer Institute Experience

Transcription:

Supplementary Appendix to manuscript submitted by Trappe, R.U. et al: Response to rituximab induction is a predictive marker in B-cell post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder and allows successful stratification into rituximab or R- CHOP consolidation in an international, prospective, multicenter phase II trial Supplementary Results Per-protocol analysis In a per-protocol analysis 32 patients who had violated inclusion criteria, had not received any protocol treatment, were lost to follow-up before final staging or deviated from protocol treatment were excluded. Patients who discontinued protocol treatment due to disease progression during R-CHOP treatment or treatmentrelated complications at any time remained in the per-protocol analysis. One patient had died before the start of protocol treatment and two were lost to follow-up before final staging. Violations of inclusion criteria had occurred in twelve patients: six with an ECOG >2, two patients without measurable disease (defined as > 2 cm in diameter and/or bone marrow involvement) and four patients whose diagnosis on pathology review was not CD20-positive PTLD. These were three cases of CD20-negative PTLD (two cases of Hodgkin s PTLD, one of plasmablastic PTLD) and one of HHV-8 associated multicentric Castleman s disease. Deviation from protocol treatment occurred in 17 patients. Three left protocol treatment at interim staging: One patient in CR chose to stop treatment and two patients in PR left the trial protocol and received radiotherapy instead of chemotherapy (physician choice). One patient had unscheduled therapy and moved to R-CHOP early despite no evidence of progression under rituximab induction. Finally, 13 patients received unscheduled additional chemo- or radiotherapy consolidation after completion of protocol treatment (rituximab induction and R-CHOP, none had achieved a complete remission with rituximab induction): eleven patients received chemotherapy (ten in partial remission, one with stable disease) and two patients received radiotherapy (one in CR, one in PR). The results in the per-protocol cohort (120 patients) confirmed the results of the intention-to-treat analysis: ORR of RSST was 87% (90/103; CR: 77% [79/103]). Median DR and median TTP were not reached; the 3-year Kaplan-Meier estimates were 85% (95% CI 77 94) and 77% (95% CI 68 85). Median OS was 7 1 years with a 3-year Kaplan-Meier estimate of 74% (95% CI 66 83). Multivariable analysis of prognostic factors We have previously reported overall response to rituximab (CR/PR vs. SD/PD), baseline international prognostic index (IPI, 3 vs. <3) as well as the transplanted organ (thoracic vs. other) as significant prognostic factors for overall survival in PTLD-1 ST. 1 To identify the prognostically relevant baseline components of different PTLD scoring systems including the IPI we had performed univariate analyses for ECOG performance status, age, Ann Arbor stage, LDH, presence of extranodal disease, graft involvement, monomorphic disease, the transplanted organ (thoracic versus other) and response to rituximab. Only ECOG performance status, age, response to rituximab and thoracic organ transplant correlated with OS. Only ECOG >2 and response to rituximab correlated with TTP. In total three parameters remained significant for OS in the PTLD-1 ST trial cohort in multivariable analysis: age >60, thoracic organ transplant and overall response to rituximab when analysed in combination with the parameters of our previously published multivariable Cox regression analyses of factors affecting OS and TTP (age, sex, time-to-ptld, EBV association, advanced stage, extranodal disease, serum LDH, ECOG 2 and violation of exclusion criteria). 2 For TTP, two parameters remained significant: overall response to rituximab and thoracic organ transplant. To validate the factors thoracic organ transplant, overall response to rituximab and IPI 3 in an independent 1

Trappe et al. patient cohort, we performed a backward-step log-rank multivariable Cox regression analysis including the factors thoracic organ transplant, overall response to rituximab and IPI 3 in the current trial cohort. This demonstrated that overall response to rituximab induction and baseline IPI 3 are highly significant independent prognostic factors for both OS and TTP in the 140/152 patients with available IPI and rituximab response data (Supplementary Table 2). High-risk group and comparison with PTLD-1 sequential treatment In the 111 patients allocated to R-CHOP consolidation, ORR was 78/92 (85%) with 55/92 (60%) complete remissions compared to 89% and 60% in the 56 patients in the PTLD-1 ST cohort not in CR after rituximab induction. Median TTP (Supplementary Figure S4A) was not reached. The 3-year Kaplan-Meier estimate was 70% (95% CI 61 80) compared to 69% (95% CI 56 82) in PTLD-1 ST. Median OS (Supplementary Figure S4B) was 7 1 years (95% CI 3 7 10 4) with a 3-year estimate of 64% (95% CI 55 74) compared to 5 1 years (95% CI 2 0 8 2) and 55% (95% CI 41 68) in PTLD-1 ST. Trial protocol http://www.lymphome.de/gruppen/dptldsg/protokolle/ptld-i-3amendment/ptld-1-3.pdf References quoted in the supplementary appendix: 1 Trappe RU, Choquet S, Dierickx D, et al. International Prognostic Index, Type of Transplant and Response to Rituximab Are Key Parameters to Tailor Treatment in Adults With CD20-Positive B Cell PTLD: Clues From the PTLD-1 Trial. Am J Transplant 2015; 15: 1091 100. 2. Trappe R, Oertel S, Leblond V, Mollee P, Sender M, Reinke P, et al. Sequential treatment with rituximab followed by CHOP chemotherapy in adult B-cell post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder (PTLD): the prospective international multicentre phase 2 PTLD-1 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2012; 13(2):196 206.

Supplementary Table 1: Comparison of baseline patient characteristics in the low-risk (patients in CR after rituximab induction) and high-risk (patients not in CR after rituximab induction) cohorts. Low-risk (n=37) High-risk (n=111) p Age/years: median (range) 48 5 (20 70) 58 0 (18 82) 0 071 60 years 10/37 (27%) 47/111 (42%) 0 097 Male 29/37 (78%) 83/111 (75%) 0 658 Transplant type Kidney 21/37 (57%) 45/111 (41%) Liver 6/37 (16%) 33/111 (30%) Lung 6/37 (16%) 12/111 (11%) Heart 2/37 (5%) 13/111 (12%) 0 316 Heart + kidney 1/37 (3%) 4/111 (4%) Kidney + pancreas 0 3/111 (3%) Heart + lung 1/37 (3%) 1/111 (1%) Time from transplantation to PTLD/years: median (range) 1 5 (0 2 27 9) 10 0 (0 18 26 1) 0 008 < 1 year 16/37 (43%) 16/111 (14%), 1 year 21/37 (57%) 95/111 (86%) <0 001 Histology Early lesion 0 2/111 (2%) Polymorphic 6/37 (16%) 14/111 (13%) Monomorphic 31/37 (84%) 94/111 (85%) Burkitt 1/37 (3%) 5/111 (5%) DLBCL 27/37 (73%) 82/111 (74%) Other B-cell, CD20-positive 3/37 (8%) 4/111 (4%) Other B-cell, CD20-negative 0 3/111 (3%) Multicentric Castleman s disease 0 1/111 (1%) EBV-association EBV-associated 23/36 (64%) 42/104 (40%) Non-EBV-associated 13/36 (36%) 62/104 (60%) 0 015 Ann Arbor stage* I 11/37 (30%) 18/110 (16%) II 5/37 (14%) 15/110 (14%) III 2/37 (5%) 18/110 (16%) 0 139* IV 19/37 (51%) 59/110 (54%) LDH Within normal range 13/37 (35%) 39/109 (36%) Elevated 24/37 (65%) 70/109 (64%) 0 944 Nodal disease 23/37 (62%) 85/110 (77%) 0 072 Extranodal disease 26/37 (70%) 80/110 (73%) 0 773 Gastrointestinal 8/37 (22%) 34/110 (31%) Liver 10/37 (27%) 24/110 (22%) Lung 7/37 (19%) 19/110 (17%) Kidney 1/37 (3%) 3/110 (3%) Bone marrow 2/37 (5%) 10/110 (9%) International Prognostic Index (IPI) <3 26/34 (76%) 60/106 (57%) 3 8/34 (24%) 46/106 (43%) 0 038 ECOG performance status 0 17/34 (50%) 22/107 (21%) 1 12/34 (41%) 53/107 (50%) 2 4/34 (12%) 27/107 (25%) 0 663 3 1/34 (3%) 5/107 (5%) DLBCL: diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, EBV: Epstein-Barr Virus, ECOG: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. *Stages I and II (localized) and III and IV (disseminated) combined for comparison. Levels 0-2 and 3-4 combined for comparison. 3

Trappe et al. Supplementary Table 2: Multivariable Cox-regression analyses for OS and TTP. Factors included in these analyses were: Thoracic organ transplant (heart, lung or combination involving heart or lung), overall response to rituximab (CR/PR vs. SD/PD) and baseline IPI 3. Cox regression model n=140, Step 2, p<0 001 OS Risk factor p HR 95% CI IPI 3 0 001 2 540 1 461 4 418 Response to rituximab <0 001 0 320 0 180 0 571 Cox regression model n=140, Step 2, p<0 001 TTP Risk factor p HR 95% CI IPI 3 0 001 3 338 1 624 6 862 Response to rituximab <0 001 0 256 0 119 0 549 OS indicates overall survival, TTP time to progression, HR hazard ratio, and CI confidence interval. Thoracic organ transplant was excluded from the model (p=0 474 for TTP and p=0 137 for OS).

Supplementary Table 3: Comparison of baseline characteristics: Patients treated in the PTLD-1 trial with sequential treatment (n=70) 2 and risk-stratified sequential treatment (n=152). PTLD-1, sequential treatment (n=70) 2 PTLD-1, risk-stratified sequential treatment (n=152) Age/years: median (range) 53 3 (16 74) 56 4 (18 82) 0 062 60 years 21/70 (30%) 60/152 (40%) 0 173 Male 47/70 (67%) 115/152 (76%) 0 184 Transplant type Kidney 29/70 (41%) 69/152 (45%) Liver 16/70 (23%) 40/152 (26%) Heart 14/70 (20%) 15/152 (10%) Lung 4/70 (6%) 18/152 (12%) Heart + kidney 0 5/152 (3%) Kidney + pancreas 4/70 (6%) 3/152 (2%) Heart + lung 2/70 (3%) 2/152 (1%) Bone marrow 1/70 (1%) 0 Time from transplantation to PTLD/years: median (range) 5 5 (0 1 25 3) 9 0 (0 2 27 9) 0 019 < 1 year 17/70 (24%) 32/152 (21%) 1 year 53/70 (76%) 120/152 (79%) 0 589 Histology Early lesion 0 2/152 (1%) Polymorphic 3/70 (4%) 20/152 (15%) Monomorphic 67/70 (96%) 129/152 (85%) Burkitt 2/70 (3%) 6/152 (4%) DLBCL 57/70 (81%) 112/152 (74%) Other B-cell, CD20 positive 6/70 (9%) 8/152 (5%) Other B-cell, CD20 negative 2/70 (3%) 3/152 (2%) Multicentric Castleman s disease 0 1/152 (1%) EBV-association EBV-associated 29/66 (44%) 67/144 (47%) Non-EBV-associated 37/66 (56%) 77/144 (53%) 0 727 Ann Arbor stage* I 9/70 (13%) 30/151 (20%) II 9/70 (13%) 20/151 (13%) III 10/70 (14%) 22/151 (15%) 0 268* IV 42/70 (60%) 79/151 (52%) LDH Within normal range 17/68 (25%) 53/150 (35%) Elevated 51/68 (75%) 97/150 (65%) 0 130 Nodal disease 40/57 (70%) 110/151 (73%) 0 701 Extranodal disease 54/67 (81%) 108/151 (72%) 0 157 Gastrointestinal 17/64 (27%) 43/151 (28%) Liver 12/64 (19%) 34/151 (23%) Lung 10/64 (16%) 26/151 (17%) Kidney 3/64 (5%) 4/151 (3%) Bone marrow 7/64 (11%) 12/151 (8%) International Prognostic Index (IPI) <3 36/65 (55%) 88/143 (62%) 3 29/65 (45%) 55/143 (38%) 0 402 ECOG performance status 0 31/68 (46%) 40/144 (28%) 1 18/68 (26%) 66/144 (46%) 2 13/68 (19%) 32/144 (22%) 0 171 3 5/68 (7%) 6/144 (4%) 4 1/68 (1%) 0 DLBCL: diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, EBV: Epstein-Barr Virus, ECOG: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. *Stages I and II (localized) and III and IV (disseminated) combined for comparison. Levels 0-2 and 3-4 combined for comparison. p 5

Trappe et al. Figure S1: Time to progression and overall survival by response to rituximab induction (blue: CR, orange: PR, violet: SD, green: PD, n=148). Numbers at risk for each population are indicated at the bottom of each graph. A: Time to progression (p<0.001). B: Overall survival (p<0.001). Of the six late deaths that occurred in patients in CR, two were attributable to progressive PTLD (after first and second relapse, respectively) whereas four were not: one death form unknown causes and three from infections.

Figure S2: Time to progression and overall survival by international prognostic Index <3 (n=88, solid line) and 3 (n=55, dashed line). 143 patients are included, as IPI data was missing in 9 patients. A: Time to progression (p=0.001). B: Overall survival (p=0.001). 7

Trappe et al. Figure S3: Time to progression and overall survival by EBV-association of PTLD. EBV-positive PTLD (n=67, solid line); EBV-negative PTLD (n=77, dashed line), EBV-status missing in 8 cases. Numbers at risk for both populations (EBV-positive and EBV-negative) are indicated at the bottom of each graph. A: Time to progression (p=0.908). B: Overall survival (p=0.793).

Figure S4: Time to progression and overall survival in the 111 patients allocated to R-CHOP consolidation (high-risk group, n=111, solid line) in comparison to the 56 patients in the PTLD-1 ST cohort 2 not in CR after rituximab induction (n=56, dashed line). Numbers at risk for both populations (RSST and ST) are indicated at the bottom of each graph. A: Time to progression. The 3-year Kaplan-Meier estimate was 70% (95% CI 61 80) compared to 69% (95% CI 56 82) in PTLD-1 ST (p=0 759). B: Overall survival. Median OS was 7 1 years (95% CI 3 7 10 4) with a 3-year estimate of 64% (95% CI 55 74) compared to 5 1 years (95% CI 2 0 8 2) and 55% (95% CI 41 68) in PTLD-1 ST (p=0 304). 9